BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28/11/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.RAJASURIA W.P.(MD)No.2671 of 2008 and M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2008 1.R.Visalakshi Aachi 2.Valli Meyyappan ... Petitioners Vs. 1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 2.The Tahsildar, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. 3.M.A.M.Ramasamy Chettiar 4.M.A.M.M.Annamalai 5.Meenakshi Aachi @ Kumararani Meena Muthiah 6.A.C.Muthaih ... Respondents Prayer Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to issue Ryotwari Patta for S.No.43/7 in Kothari Village, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District pursuant to the decree in O.S.No.38 of 1983 on the file of the District Munsif, Devakottai dated 13.02.1986 which has been confirmed in appeal and has reached finality. !For Petitioners ... Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan ^For RR1 to R2 ... Mr.D.Sasikumar Government Advocate For RR3 & R5 ... Mr.T.Lenin Bharathi For RR4 and 5 ... No appearance :ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to
issue Ryotwari Patta for S.No.43/7 in Kothari Village, Karaikudi Taluk,
Sivagangai District pursuant to the decree in O.S.No.38 of 1983 on the file of
the District Munsif, Devakottai dated 13.02.1986 which has been confirmed in
appeal and has reached finality.
2. Heard Mr.R.Sundar Srinivasan, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Mr.D.Sasikumar, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 and also
Mr.T.Lenin Bharathi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 5.
3. A summation and summarization of the facts which are absolutely
necessary and germane for the disposal of this writ petition could succinctly be
set out thus:
The propositors of the petitioners viz., R.Ramanathan Chettiar filed a
suit in O.S.No.38 of 1983 before the District Munsif Court, Devakottai and
obtained a decree to the effect that in respect of of the property concerned, he
is the absolute owner. In that suit, Government was a party. Being aggrieved
by the said Judgment and decree, an appeal was filed in A.S.No.1 of 1987 on the
file of the Sub Court, Devakottai, which was dismissed; as against which to the
knowledge of the petitioner no second appeal was filed. While so, when the
petitioners approached the Revenue Officials for issuance of patta based on the
Civil Court’s decree, they had a volte face and did not issue a patta. Hence,
this writ petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is a trite
proposition of law that based on the civil court’s decree, the patta should be
issued as the civil court is the competent authority and also the final
authority to decide on the title of a person over a land.
5. Whereas, the learned Government Advocate by placing reliance on the
counter affidavit, would develop his arguments that the memorandum of the second
appeal in SASR.No.24049 of 2005 has been filed as against the said order and
there is no specific direction in the civil court’s decree that patta should be
issued; in fact the land is a poromboke land and accordingly patta cannot be
issued.
6. Considering pro et contra, it is clear in this factual matrix that as
per the decision of this Court in Srinivasan and 6 others v. Sri
Madhyarjuneswaraswami, Pattavaithalai, Thiruchirappalli District by its
Executive Officer at Pattavaithalai Devasthanam and 5 others reported in 1998
(II) M.L.J Page 722, the Civil court decree should get reflected in the revenue
records and the Government having been a party in the civil Court proceedings
cannot veer round and quite antithetical to the decree which was issued,
contend that there is no specific direction for issuance of patta in favour of
the petitioner; such a plea is neither here nor there. If at all any second
appeal would be entertained by the High Court and if any order, is going to be
passed in favour of the petitioner, then in that case, the revenue records
should automatically get changed consequent upon the High Court’s order, the
revenue officials are having no power to reject the prayer of the petitioner and
accordingly the following direction is issued:
The Revenue authorities concerned shall in commensurate with the available
Civil Court’s decree shall make necessary entries in the revenue records and
accordingly issue patta within a period of one month from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order subject to the ultimate judgment, which would be passed by
this Court in the second appeal if any.
7. With the above said observation and direction, this writ petition is
disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
dp/smn
To
1.The District Collector,
Sivagangai District,
Sivagangai.
2.The Tahsildar,
Karaikudi,
Sivagangai District.